Clear and Firm Regulations

Oct 13, 2025 by miodeya.com 64 views

Tender Conspiracy Through Loan Borrowing Company Name in Construction Project in Bogor Regency: Case Study of KPPU Number 15/KPPU-L/2023

Understanding Tender Conspiracy

Tender conspiracy is a form of collaboration between business actors aimed at winning the project tender. In this context, the procurement of goods/services refers to the process carried out by the ministries, institutions, or regional apparatuses financed by the State Budget (APBN) or the Regional Revenue and Expenditure Budget (APBD). One of the unethical practices in the procurement is the misuse of company names or borrowing identity between business actors to regulate the winner of the tender. This practice is a serious issue that can lead to unfair competition and harm the integrity of the business competition system.

The Role of KPPU in Enforcing Business Competition Law

The KPPU (Komisi Pengawas Persaingan Usaha) is an independent institution responsible for enforcing business competition law in Indonesia. In this case, the KPPU received a report on the construction project to improve the Roda-Pakansari Road in Bogor Regency. The results of the KPPU investigation show that three parties reported, namely Lai Bui Min, PT Lambok Ulina, and PT Tureloto Battu Indah, were proven to have committed violations as regulated in Article 22 of Law No. 5/1999. The practice of borrowing the name of the company in this tender process clearly violates the law and is not allowed.

The Impact of Tender Conspiracy on Business Competition

The practice of borrowing and borrowing the name of the company in the tender not only harms the procurement process, but also damages the integrity of the business competition system. This can result in injustice for business actors who comply with the rules and harm the country due to budget waste. Therefore, the authors argue that important steps need to be taken, including making clear and firm regulations regarding the prohibition of using company names accompanied by appropriate sanctions.

The Importance of Socialization and Collaboration

From a legal perspective, the KPPU's action in establishing this decision shows a commitment to maintain market integrity and encourage business actors to compete in a healthy manner. However, in the future there needs to be an increase in socialization regarding this prohibition so that businesses better understand the legal implications of these harmful practices. In addition, collaboration between the government and the private sector to increase transparency and accountability in the procurement process is also very necessary.

Case Study: KPPU Decision Number 15/KPPU-L/2023

The KPPU's decision number 15/KPPU-L/2023 is a significant case study that highlights the importance of enforcing business competition law in Indonesia. The decision shows that the KPPU is committed to maintaining market integrity and encouraging business actors to compete in a healthy manner. However, the decision also highlights the need for further socialization and collaboration between the government and the private sector to increase transparency and accountability in the procurement process.

Conclusion

In conclusion, tender conspiracy is a serious issue that can lead to unfair competition and harm the integrity of the business competition system. The KPPU's decision number 15/KPPU-L/2023 is a significant case study that highlights the importance of enforcing business competition law in Indonesia. The authors argue that important steps need to be taken, including making clear and firm regulations regarding the prohibition of using company names accompanied by appropriate sanctions. In addition, collaboration between the government and the private sector to increase transparency and accountability in the procurement process is also very necessary.

Recommendations

Based on the findings of this study, the authors recommend the following:

Clear and Firm Regulations: The government should make clear and firm regulations regarding the prohibition of using company names accompanied by appropriate sanctions.
Socialization: The KPPU and other relevant institutions should increase socialization regarding this prohibition so that businesses better understand the legal implications of these harmful practices.
Collaboration: Collaboration between the government and the private sector to increase transparency and accountability in the procurement process is also very necessary.
Enforcement: The KPPU and other relevant institutions should enforce business competition law more effectively to prevent tender conspiracy and other forms of unfair competition.

Future Research Directions

This study highlights the importance of enforcing business competition law in Indonesia. Future research directions could include:

Case Studies: Conducting more case studies on tender conspiracy and other forms of unfair competition to better understand the issue.
Survey Research: Conducting survey research to better understand the perceptions and attitudes of business actors towards tender conspiracy and other forms of unfair competition.
Policy Analysis: Conducting policy analysis to better understand the impact of business competition law on the economy and society.

Limitations of the Study

This study has several limitations, including:

Case Study: The study is based on a single case study, which may not be representative of the broader issue of tender conspiracy.
Data Collection: The study relies on secondary data, which may not be comprehensive or accurate.
Theoretical Framework: The study uses a theoretical framework that may not be comprehensive or accurate.

Conclusion

Q: What is tender conspiracy? A: Tender conspiracy is a form of collaboration between business actors aimed at winning the project tender. It involves the misuse of company names or borrowing identity between business actors to regulate the winner of the tender.

Q: What is the impact of tender conspiracy on business competition? A: The practice of borrowing and borrowing the name of the company in the tender not only harms the procurement process, but also damages the integrity of the business competition system. This can result in injustice for business actors who comply with the rules and harm the country due to budget waste.

Q: What is the role of KPPU in enforcing business competition law? A: The KPPU (Komisi Pengawas Persaingan Usaha) is an independent institution responsible for enforcing business competition law in Indonesia. In this case, the KPPU received a report on the construction project to improve the Roda-Pakansari Road in Bogor Regency and investigated the allegations of tender conspiracy.

Q: What are the consequences of tender conspiracy? A: The consequences of tender conspiracy can be severe, including:

Unfair competition
Damage to the integrity of the business competition system
Injustice for business actors who comply with the rules
Harm to the country due to budget waste

Q: How can tender conspiracy be prevented? A: To prevent tender conspiracy, the government and relevant institutions should:

Make clear and firm regulations regarding the prohibition of using company names accompanied by appropriate sanctions
Increase socialization regarding this prohibition so that businesses better understand the legal implications of these harmful practices
Collaborate with the private sector to increase transparency and accountability in the procurement process

Q: What is the significance of KPPU Decision Number 15/KPPU-L/2023? A: The KPPU's decision number 15/KPPU-L/2023 is a significant case study that highlights the importance of enforcing business competition law in Indonesia. The decision shows that the KPPU is committed to maintaining market integrity and encouraging business actors to compete in a healthy manner.

Q: What are the recommendations for preventing tender conspiracy? A: Based on the findings of this study, the authors recommend the following:

Clear and firm regulations regarding the prohibition of using company names accompanied by appropriate sanctions
Socialization regarding this prohibition so that businesses better understand the legal implications of these harmful practices
Collaboration between the government and the private sector to increase transparency and accountability in the procurement process
Enforcement of business competition law more effectively to prevent tender conspiracy and other forms of unfair competition

Q: What are the future research directions on tender conspiracy? A: Future research directions could include:

Conducting more case studies on tender conspiracy and other forms of unfair competition to better understand the issue
Conducting survey research to better understand the perceptions and attitudes of business actors towards tender conspiracy and other forms of unfair competition
Conducting policy analysis to better understand the impact of business competition law on the economy and society

Q: What are the limitations of this study? A: This study has several limitations, including:

Case study: The study is based on a single case study, which may not be representative of the broader issue of tender conspiracy
Data collection: The study relies on secondary data, which may not be comprehensive or accurate
Theoretical framework: The study uses a theoretical framework that may not be comprehensive or accurate